Prime Minister John Howard has left up to the states, the decision about whether or not gun laws should be tightened after this morning's fatal rush-hour shooting in Melbourne's CBD.

Police say a man opened fire with a handgun at point-blank range on the corner of Flinders Lane and William Street, killing another man and leaving two others in critical conditions about 8:15am AEST.

The three people were shot after a man tried to stop the shooter as he dragged a woman from a taxi on Flinders Lane.

A 24-year-old woman and a man in his 30s were rushed to the Royal Melbourne Hospital with gunshot wounds to their upper bodies.

The shooting has prompted Greens leader Bob Brown to renew his call for a ban on semi-automatic handguns.

Mr Howard says he is prepared to discuss the issue.

"One of the very first things I did as Prime Minister was achieve a massive additional ban on the use of long arms," he said.

"As far as handguns are concerned, we do have very strict laws, I'm always ready to talk to the state premiers who do have immediate control over these matters about whether they can be and ought to be further strengthened."

But Senator Brown says action needs to be taken immediately.

"I have been campaigning against this since the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, which took semi-automatic rifles largely out of circulation but left these equally lethal hand guns available," he said.

I'm still not seeing any point to further bans, the thing that seems to have stirred the media up is that it's in the middle of the CBD of a major city and that more than one person was shot.

I'm being serious. There's a war being fought every day, and every day people die. Innocent bystanders who refuse to believe that they could make a difference in this war?

What is this war?

It's crime. Every day, people die from shootings, muggings, knifings, etc. People don't seem to understand that guns are there for their own protection. Arm every citizen, train every citizen, and what happens? Do you know how much crime would go down? The only people getting attacked would be anti-gun activists. Banning guns doesn't help. If it did, criminals would never be able to get some of the more common guns. And, answer this honestly: Do you really think that someone who plans to rob a bank and maybe kill someone is going to give a crap that they're carrying an illegal weapon?

You want to make sure that no one can gun you down in a park for no reason? Carry a gun and shoot the bastard. Amazing how simple it is.

Edit: I'd like to point out that banning semi-automatic handguns is just the start for banning guns in general.

I'm being serious. There's a war being fought every day, and every day people die. Innocent bystanders who refuse to believe that they could make a difference in this war?

What is this war?

It's crime. Every day, people die from shootings, muggings, knifings, etc. People don't seem to understand that guns are there for their own protection. Arm every citizen, train every citizen, and what happens? Do you know how much crime would go down? The only people getting attacked would be anti-gun activists. Banning guns doesn't help. If it did, criminals would never be able to get some of the more common guns. And, answer this honestly: Do you really think that someone who plans to rob a bank and maybe kill someone is going to give a crap that they're carrying an illegal weapon?

You want to make sure that no one can gun you down in a park for no reason? Carry a gun and shoot the bastard. Amazing how simple it is.

Edit: I'd like to point out that banning semi-automatic handguns is just the start for banning guns in general.

How the fuck have you been here for two years but you're still a stupid fucking cunt?

I'm being serious. There's a war being fought every day, and every day people die. Innocent bystanders who refuse to believe that they could make a difference in this war?

What is this war?

It's crime. Every day, people die from shootings, muggings, knifings, etc. People don't seem to understand that guns are there for their own protection. Arm every citizen, train every citizen, and what happens? Do you know how much crime would go down? The only people getting attacked would be anti-gun activists. Banning guns doesn't help. If it did, criminals would never be able to get some of the more common guns. And, answer this honestly: Do you really think that someone who plans to rob a bank and maybe kill someone is going to give a crap that they're carrying an illegal weapon?

You want to make sure that no one can gun you down in a park for no reason? Carry a gun and shoot the bastard. Amazing how simple it is.

Edit: I'd like to point out that banning semi-automatic handguns is just the start for banning guns in general.

I fucking. hate. you.

Guys how the hell do we keep attracting these people? It's like whatever Nick had was catching and spread via the internet...

_________________Where in the name of Deus Ex Machina did that T-Rex come from?

I'm being serious. There's a war being fought every day, and every day people die. Innocent bystanders who refuse to believe that they could make a difference in this war?

What is this war?

It's crime. Every day, people die from shootings, muggings, knifings, etc. People don't seem to understand that guns are there for their own protection. Arm every citizen, train every citizen, and what happens? Do you know how much crime would go down? The only people getting attacked would be anti-gun activists. Banning guns doesn't help. If it did, criminals would never be able to get some of the more common guns. And, answer this honestly: Do you really think that someone who plans to rob a bank and maybe kill someone is going to give a crap that they're carrying an illegal weapon?

You want to make sure that no one can gun you down in a park for no reason? Carry a gun and shoot the bastard. Amazing how simple it is.

Edit: I'd like to point out that banning semi-automatic handguns is just the start for banning guns in general.

How the fuck have you been here for two years but you're still a stupid fucking cunt?

Try reading the article next time.

Alright, I'm fairly sure no one can be that moronic, so let me say this: If you disagree with me, address the ISSUE.

If you really are that stupid, please go ahead and point to where my post doesn't address it.

I'm being serious. There's a war being fought every day, and every day people die. Innocent bystanders who refuse to believe that they could make a difference in this war?

What is this war?

It's crime. Every day, people die from shootings, muggings, knifings, etc. People don't seem to understand that guns are there for their own protection. Arm every citizen, train every citizen, and what happens? Do you know how much crime would go down? The only people getting attacked would be anti-gun activists. Banning guns doesn't help. If it did, criminals would never be able to get some of the more common guns. And, answer this honestly: Do you really think that someone who plans to rob a bank and maybe kill someone is going to give a crap that they're carrying an illegal weapon?

You want to make sure that no one can gun you down in a park for no reason? Carry a gun and shoot the bastard. Amazing how simple it is.

Edit: I'd like to point out that banning semi-automatic handguns is just the start for banning guns in general.

How the fuck have you been here for two years but you're still a stupid fucking cunt?

Try reading the article next time.

Alright, I'm fairly sure no one can be that moronic, so let me say this: If you disagree with me, address the ISSUE.

If you really are that stupid, please go ahead and point to where my post doesn't address it.

The ISSUE is you're a moron and it's impossible to argue with the pile of steaming retardation you off loaded a few post previously due to this fact.

I don't think any of us would know where to begin frankly.

So let's just stay with - you are a moron and your view points are so retarded that no-one can get past the first line of your little rant because their eyes glaze over in horror.

_________________Where in the name of Deus Ex Machina did that T-Rex come from?

Guy dragged a woman out of her car with a gun. It's a fair assumption that he planned on using that gun if things went wrong (and, even more likely, to kill the woman he was dragging out of said car). Since this is what actually happened, I don't think that this assumption is likely correct. Going beyond just THIS case (because you don't get the full scope unless you go beyond a single case), bank robbers have done this before. With illegal weapons. Do you think this guy cared whether or not what he was carrying was illegal or not?

To STOP him, what do you think would be a good thing to do? Run away crying? Or maybe shooting HIM. You think maybe that would be a good idea? You are not going to be there when this happened, because you cannot go back in time, but to prevent yourself from being shot later (parks seem to be a good place for getting shot by psychos), carrying a gun would probably be a good idea.

Now, I seriously doubt any of you are going to care, since you'd rather insult someone than actually talk about things that MATTER, or things that people MIGHT disagree with you on.

Guy dragged a woman out of her car with a gun. It's a fair assumption that he planned on using that gun if things went wrong (and, even more likely, to kill the woman he was dragging out of said car). Since this is what actually happened, I don't think that this assumption is likely correct. Going beyond just THIS case (because you don't get the full scope unless you go beyond a single case), bank robbers have done this before. With illegal weapons. Do you think this guy cared whether or not what he was carrying was illegal or not?

To STOP him, what do you think would be a good thing to do? Run away crying? Or maybe shooting HIM. You think maybe that would be a good idea? You are not going to be there when this happened, because you cannot go back in time, but to prevent yourself from being shot later (parks seem to be a good place for getting shot by psychos), carrying a gun would probably be a good idea.

Now, I seriously doubt any of you are going to care, since you'd rather insult someone than actually talk about things that MATTER, or things that people MIGHT disagree with you on.

I live in a country with gun control. I'm not likely to be dragged out of a car by mad gunman because after the Dunblane massacre - at which time guns were legal including those owned by the culprit- there was a gun amnesty in Scotland and for all intents and purposes I am not a member of glasgow drug gang.

Not to mention the fact that if the number of guns increase the number of innocent bystanders increase as does the level of gun crime. Deductive logic.

In a society where everyone owns a gun and it's considered legal and a 'kill or be killed' attitude arises a lot of people are going to be shot accidentally by terrified trigger happy people.

Deductive logic.

Also, what is your problem with parks? I live right beside one and I have never been shot by a psycho.

Don't get ouside much do we?

_________________Where in the name of Deus Ex Machina did that T-Rex come from?

Onion, I would like to personally thank you for getting back on topic. And, while I agree that it seems that it would increase crime, if people in this instance (and others) brought guns with them, they could have shot the gunman before that person could kill as many people as they did.

My problem with parks is that I live in Reno. We have a lot of crazy killers here.

Onion, I would like to personally thank you for getting back on topic. And, while I agree that it seems that it would increase crime, if people in this instance (and others) brought guns with them, they could have shot the gunman before that person could kill as many people as they did.

My problem with parks is that I live in Reno. We have a lot of crazy killers here.

Or they could have missed, not being a very good shot, killed a near by child and the whole mess could have degenerated into a mexican standoff/hostage situation.

Or in this magical gun filled future of yours is everyone a time ninja lethal Jet Li assasin?

More guns, are not the answer.

_________________Where in the name of Deus Ex Machina did that T-Rex come from?

Guy dragged a woman out of her car with a gun. It's a fair assumption that he planned on using that gun if things went wrong (and, even more likely, to kill the woman he was dragging out of said car). Since this is what actually happened, I don't think that this assumption is likely correct. Going beyond just THIS case (because you don't get the full scope unless you go beyond a single case), bank robbers have done this before. With illegal weapons. Do you think this guy cared whether or not what he was carrying was illegal or not?

To STOP him, what do you think would be a good thing to do? Run away crying? Or maybe shooting HIM. You think maybe that would be a good idea? You are not going to be there when this happened, because you cannot go back in time, but to prevent yourself from being shot later (parks seem to be a good place for getting shot by psychos), carrying a gun would probably be a good idea.

Now, I seriously doubt any of you are going to care, since you'd rather insult someone than actually talk about things that MATTER, or things that people MIGHT disagree with you on.

your point: if everyone had a gun, they could have shot the guy trying to pull the woman from the cab

The rest of the worlds point: if everyone has a gun, people would get shot over the stupidest reasons, such as jumping in the cab before you while you had your hand on the door handle. There are enouhg stupid people to do such a thing, as they do stupid shit like this ALREADY

Having everyone own a gun would not even fit into Darwins law, because the stupid people can shoot all the smart ones becuase they wont stop to think about the consequences of their actions befroe they act.

Blue Sun Missilewould not want stupid people to have guns, hence he never visits texas

_________________

Pintsize wrote:

"If Aliens ever really tried to contact us, it'd be through the internet, then 4CHAN would probably scare them off"

Which is why certain gun control laws would be useful. A good shot, for example, would be a good requirement for owning a gun. Yeah, they could have missed, but if you're a good shot, you don't have to worry so much. I'm assuming that he shot people without cover (since no one was shooting at thim, there'd be no point), hence most of his body was exposed.

Now, another issue comes to mind: He might have been holding the woman in such a way so as to present only a small target. I admit that I didn't think about this possibility in my first post, but it would seem to me that this point wouldn't come up in certain other situations (the ones I listed).

As for me? If I'm somewhere where people are getting shot, I'd like to have a chance to defend myself and the people around me. Otherwise, I'm just lying down and dying. Police can't be everywhere, but if enough people took enough time out of their lives to learn how to use a gun, then THOSE people could be darn close to everywhere.

The mistake in most gun debates is when someone goes "If you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns"

This is economically incorrect.
When you outlaw guns the production of guns worldwide decreases, its not like reliable guns are easy to mass produce and transport around the world, drugs are easy enough because you only need an arseload of land, two farmers and some decent rain to produce enough coke to make New York liveable and LA tolerable.
So in the short term gun production will drop globally after massive gun restrictions, increasing their value/price on the black market as homemade guns become the standard. These will not be cheap as setting up a production facility and distribution chain would be difficult(although creating a cell system with each cell constructing just one individual part might work but the co-ordination would be difficult) leading to increased opportunity costs associated with using a gun in a crime(the price of the gun coupled with the legal risks of using said gun would eventually be prohibitive compared to the cost benefit of using it so knives and other fun things will be used instead).
In the long term, as long as police destroy all banned weapons that they encounter, as well as increasing penalties for illegal manufacture of guns the number of guns readily available to the public should decrease.

Yes, my degree is useless.

Also one of the dead guys in Melbourne was killed trying to help someone else who'd been shot already.

And in the example Psionics gave about civilians shooting the "bad guy" when the cops arrive their chances of shooting an armed "friendly" increase.

And I live in the middle of a giant forest, we get little crime outside of the random tagger wankers(which having watched the last episode of One Tree Hill for this season is pretty much any young person).

Actor.

_________________"Why can't we go back to living like cavemen? I know it was a rough and ready existence - the men where always rough and the women were always ready! " - Santa.

All hail the all knowing one. Teach us how our out dated concepts of gun control and stricter policing of available fire arms can be rectified.

:v :v :v

And here's where my original point comes to the front again - your opinion is stupid. I can't debate it because you lack a connection with reality somewhere in your head and actually trying to debate this is like yelling my point into the ear of a profoundly deaf autistic child.

Increasing the availability of guns = increase in gun crime.

_________________Where in the name of Deus Ex Machina did that T-Rex come from?

Last edited by onion on Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

My problem with parks is that I live in Reno. We have a lot of crazy killers here.

I see the problem. You're viewing the article as if the incident occurred in the US. Australian gun issues are vastly different from US ones. Gun limitations are closer to that of the UK than those of the US since 1996. Also, there's nowhere near as large a pro-gun lobby in Australia; the urban centres far outweigh the rural interests, especially when it comes to guns. Plus people don't think automatic and semiautomatic rifles are needed to shoot kangaroos. Or crocodiles.

My problem with parks is that I live in Reno. We have a lot of crazy killers here.

I see the problem. You're viewing the article as if the incident occurred in the US. Australian gun issues are vastly different from US ones. Gun limitations are closer to that of the UK than those of the US since 1996. Also, there's nowhere near as large a pro-gun lobby in Australia; the urban centres far outweigh the rural interests, especially when it comes to guns. Plus people don't think automatic and semiautomatic rifles are needed to shoot kangaroos. Or crocodiles.

This is probably right. I was thinking of gun control in terms of things like prohibition, but if that happened in Australia or some such, then I doubt there would be as many problems with it as there were in the US.

I doubt there would be as many problems with it as there were in the US.

Yeah because we currently have it in our constitution that we are allowed to own firearms. Whether or not this is a good idea I will not debate here, as I most likely lack the patience, time, and effort to. However the reasons for owning a gun now and when the amendment was made have changed. Yet some people would not see the connection *coughNRAcough* and would protest loudly to keep their guns.

The idea of trigger-happy criminals shooting up a bank is bad enough, you want to add trigger-happy civilians in there as well?

Is it still counted as a massacre if the poeple who did it were just trying to shoot at each other, but got everyone else instead?

I'm quite happy to leave shooting at and capturing criminals up to the <b>trained proffessionals</b> whose job it is to do so. If i wanted to get shot at and killed or shoot at and kill people i'd join the fucking army.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum